1. Crowdsourcing Color Perceptions using Mobile Devices Jaejeung Kim 1, Sergey Leksikov 1, Punyotai Thamjamrassri 2, Uichin Lee 1, Hyeon-Jeong Suk 2 1 Dept. Knowledge Service Engineering 2 Dept. Industrial Design CrowdColor

2. Motivation Related Work CrowdColor Design Experiment 1: CrowdColor Generation Experiment 2: CrowdColor User Evaluation Limitations Conclusion & Future Work Overview

3. Color is a primary purchase criterion in fashion. Inaccurate colors leads to negative shopping experiences (Parker et al. 2009). Motivation 3/20

4. Expectation Motivation Reality VS 4/20

5. Customer reviews are a key source of subjective opinions of the product. However it is not easy to convey precise meaning of color. Motivation 5/20

6. Capturing HW/SW Lighting conditions Manual editing Image generationImage renderingImage viewing Motivation Product viewing Display HW Rendering SW 6/20

7. Image generationImage renderingImage viewing Related Work Product viewing Color Reproduction: -Automatic white balancing -Display adaptive tone mapping (ACM TOG’08) -Color Match (MobileHCI’08) Crowdsourcing Graphical Perceptions: -Visualization judgement task (CHI’10) -Extracting color themes from images (CHI’13) Color Match (MobileHCI’08) Color theme extraction (CHI’13) 7/20

8. We aim to design and evaluate a color generation application that 1)Receives explicit color inputs using a color picker 2)Aggregating the inputs into a color that can represent the product (CrowdColor) in a form of a customer review. CrowdColor Design 8/20

9. 1)The customer perceives the color of the product 2)Selects the perceived color using the color picker CrowdColor Design selected color color picker ① ② 9/20

10. 3)Selected colors are sent to the server 4)Server aggregates the RGB data inputs into a representative color 5)Device/light adaptive aggregation* could be made CrowdColor Design Server ③ ③ ③ ④ *Color input from only a certain device under certain lighting condition will be aggregated to be given to a customer with the same environmental conditions. (e.g. iphone user under a fluorescent light will be given the aggregated colors from iphone users under fluorescent light) 10/20

11. Goal: -Generate CrowdColor and assess its accuracy. -Observe crowd worker’s color perception and selection ability. Method: -31 participants (12 females), in lab controlled experiment -4 (colors) × 2 (lighting conditions) × 2 (devices) Experiment 1: CrowdColor Generation 11/20

12. Color stimuli: Red, blue, yellow, gray Lighting conditions: Daylight(5400K), Incandescent(3800K) Display device: Samsung Galaxy S4 (AMOLED), iPhone 5s (IPS) Experiment 1: CrowdColor Generation 5400K 3800K 12/20

13. Experiment 1: CrowdColor Generation From the user inputs, we generated two types of CrowdColors: 1)Adaptively-mapped CrowdColor (ACC): hypothetically the best case 2)Reversely-mapped CrowdColor (BCC): hypothetically the worst case All the CrowdColors were measured with spectrophotometer to acquire color accuracies (accuracy = color difference between the color stimuli and the CrowdColor) 13/20

14. Experiment 1: Results The best performing case was B1 (Δ = 2.0 < JND ≈ 2.3) All ACC outperformed RCC. 14/20

15. Experiment 1: Results Effect of color, light, and device on color accuracy: 1)Both color and light had a significant effect on color accuracy 2)Device did not independently affect color accuracy 3)Interaction effect of the color and device on the color accuracy marginally significant. 15/20

16. Experiment 1: Results Effect of color, light, and device on input time: 1)Only the color had a significant effect on time. 2)Yellow, blue, gray required more effort than red  Consistent with the post interview, where more than 50% users reported yellow and blue were hard to locate. 16/20

17. Experiment 2: CrowdColor User Evaluation Goal: -Assess the subjective agreement level of perceived color similarity Method: -18 participants, given 2 devices, under 2 lighting conditions -Evaluate perceived color accuracy of previously generated CrowdColors -Only evaluated the best performing ACCs -Total of 144 responses collected 17/20

18. Experiment 2: Results CrowdColors were positively accepted overall -73% were positive or neutral -Exit interview revealed CrowdColor was not precisely the same -But it is more trustworthy than the images provided by the sellers 18/20

19. Limitations Not all colors are locatable : Display device cannot represent all colors that exists in the real world Controlled settings : Current study was a in lab experiment. In the wild study could decrease its accuracy Different types of materials needs to be tested : We mainly considered standardized color papers. Further study of various materials (e.g. fabric, metal) needs to be conducted for generalizability. 19/20

20. Conclusion & Future Work Explored viability of crowdsourcing color inputs from a real world object. The accuracy of the CrowdColor was examined in relation to environmental factors. User study revealed it is positive overall and trustworthy in online shopping. Large-scale, in-situ study will be conducted in the future. 20/20

21. Please visit CrowdColor.net and try for yourself! Thank you

22. Color Difference (Δ)